Toyota GR86 v Mazda MX-5 v Alpine A110 GT (EVO Magazine Review)

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by ACT86

Haha yep, I’m a Lotus fanatic, so it’s always the Porsches they get compared to.

Well it's a testament to Lotus that it constantly gets compared with Porsche.


I think in a parallel Universe where Porsche didn't exist, Lotus would be more successful than it is.


Having said this, one of the allures of the Lotus is it's exclusivity. You don't see many of them around so when you have one, you technically got yourself a cut price exotic in so many ways.



I've come so close to buying a Lotus so many times. Maybe one day in the future.



If I lived in the UK, the choice of buying one would be much easier.

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by alex87f

I find it interesting the way they say the GT86 changed the sports car landscape, which is an idea I've read in other GR86 reviews. Yet, I feel like all you could read about the first gens back when they were released was how underpowered they were.

The claim of changing the sports car landscape is really tricky business. All in all, I don't think being under powered is that crucial.



The Honda NSX was arguably underpowered compared to its competitors. It definilty changed the sports car landscape forever. That car sold in such small volumes, it's hard to believe it had that big of an impact on sports car history.



For the 86, how many sports cars for around $30k get compared to Ferrari?

The 86 most definitely had a huge impact on the sports car landscape. To put things in context, speaking on a personal level, the car never felt under powered for me. I even had a friend of mine with a Porsche ride shotgun with me, launching it and all. He also was surprised this is a car everyone touts as being slow. If it's not outright pace, it's the sensation of speed that it gives. For me personally, I think I would've owned different sports cars by now, but the 86 just makes a very strong argument that negates the others.

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by CincyJohn

This is the first review I have ever seen that says that they think the Gen1 is better looking than the Gen2. I figured Tcoat would have done a victory lap by now.

I think it's the front bonnet of Gen1 that wins over the Gen2. Gen1's front bonnet looks very low, unique, and sporty looking. It gives the Gen1 a more exclusive look than the Gen2.



I'm judging this just by pictures. I've never seen a Gen2 in real life.



I will reserve judgment until I see both Gen1 & Gen2 next to each other in real life. But yeah this front bonnet thing is really making modern cars look very ugly in real life.


It's not exclusive to the 86. I've seen it in like say the new Honda Civic. This raised bonnet is more glaring in smaller cars. The manufacturers try to hide it with styling cues.



Anyway, it's not like the Gen2 is hideous or anything so it's all good

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by fredzy

I revere the A110 for being such a pure drivers car and would absolutely have one if I lived in Europe. It's silly but a big part of my respect for it comes from the fact that James May and especially Gordon Murray bought one.

The 110 instantly sprang to mind when I first saw the 2nd gen (below is the pic) and that was only reinforced as more details came and people started driving it. That weighed heavily in my decision to actually buy one. So reading this review, from EVO no less, is a bit wow.

I feel like the A110 missed out on some key features I would never look past: Manual transmission, NA engine, and Limited Slip Diff.



Among these 3, I think the manual transmission is the biggest. I find myself constantly reaching for the keys of my FT86 among all vehicles I have access to. When I sit with myself and think carefully why, I would say it's mostly for the fun of rowing your own gears It's like 50% of the fun.

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by alex87f

Looks like the issue is the bonnet-to-engine distance. Which is weird, you'd think a flat four would be well-placed in that department. But maybe they're measuring distance to the dressed block, in which case it's true the intake manifold or alternator are fairly close to the bonnet.

And SUVs are indeed well-placed in that area: they tend to have lots of "soft" metal over a relatively small engine.

I also read that end-of-sale might be linked to absence of automatic emergency braking on manual cars, but I'm not so sure about that one.

Maybe next gen 86 will be mid-engine then?

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by rennlistuser3

I feel like the A110 missed out on some key features I would never look past: Manual transmission, NA engine, and Limited Slip Diff.

Going on a bit of a tangent, but most mid-engine sport cars lack an LSD entirely, or only offered as an option in the "race-trims". The cited reason is that MR have enough weight on the rear wheels to make traction not an issue and that an LSD in an MR platform causes understeer on track (negating the benefits of an LSD for overall lap times). Lotus presumably only ever offered an LSD in the Elise after US autocross drivers complained about it (something that Lotus did concede made sense for autocross speeds and tightness of turns, but still stuck to their claim that for track work an LSD is detrimental).

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

Going on a bit of a tangent, but most mid-engine sport cars lack an LSD entirely, or only offered as an option in the "race-trims". The cited reason is that MR have enough weight on the rear wheels to make traction not an issue and that an LSD in an MR platform causes understeer on track (negating the benefits of an LSD for overall lap times). Lotus presumably only ever offered an LSD in the Elise after US autocross drivers complained about it (something that Lotus did concede made sense for autocross speeds and tightness of turns, but still stuck to their claim that for track work an LSD is detrimental).

Porsche has claimed the same reasons for not offering LSDs on their cars. now that LSDs became active torque vectoring on expensive cars they're all over it though.

It depends on driving style really, if you prefer tail out antics that are facilitated by front engine, RWD, and longer wheelbases (BMW, Nissan S chassis, Gt86/GR86) then an LSD is absolutely beneficial. If you prefer more precision driving that is better suited to a short wheelbase mid/rear engined car (Porsche, Lotus, Alpine), then you don't really need it. Those cars don't really want to drive with the tail out, they always feel like they actively discourage it.

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

Going on a bit of a tangent, but most mid-engine sport cars lack an LSD entirely, or only offered as an option in the "race-trims". The cited reason is that MR have enough weight on the rear wheels to make traction not an issue and that an LSD in an MR platform causes understeer on track (negating the benefits of an LSD for overall lap times). Lotus presumably only ever offered an LSD in the Elise after US autocross drivers complained about it (something that Lotus did concede made sense for autocross speeds and tightness of turns, but still stuck to their claim that for track work an LSD is detrimental).

Interesting stuff you guys. Learned something new today.



I will need to go do my own digging on this subject as I've honestly never heard of this before. But overall yeah it's fun to learn something new.

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

Porsche has claimed the same reasons for not offering LSDs on their cars. now that LSDs became active torque vectoring on expensive cars they're all over it though.

It depends on driving style really, if you prefer tail out antics that are facilitated by front engine, RWD, and longer wheelbases (BMW, Nissan S chassis, Gt86/GR86) then an LSD is absolutely beneficial. If you prefer more precision driving that is better suited to a short wheelbase mid/rear engined car (Porsche, Lotus, Alpine), then you don't really need it. Those cars don't really want to drive with the tail out, they always feel like they actively discourage it.

The FT86 is my first experience with an LSD and I've been loving it ever since. It ranks very high on my list of must haves now on any sports car.


Mid engine cars have the advantage of sound with the engine being right behind you, you get to hear the engine more. This is a big deal for me. They do turn in better as well of course. But, I personally really do like the tail out antics as you put it. It's tremendous fun even if it just slides a little bit. The nose of the 86 seems to be accurate enough. Even the EVO article mentioned while the A110 did have sharper turn in, the 86 still held its own.



Overall, I lean towards mid engine over front engine but this statement of yours is making me backtrack that preference. Maybe the 86 did hit the goldilocks point of streetable fun.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by rennlistuser3

Maybe the 86 did hit the goldilocks point of streetable fun.

I would argue it did. Both the ZC6/ZN6 and ZD8/ZN8 absolutely nailed the streetable fun sports car. I think they harness the spirit of the S13/14 and the 944 in a modern car. it drives like a late 80s/early 90s car in the best way possible.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

if you prefer tail out antics that are facilitated by front engine, RWD, and longer wheelbases (BMW, Nissan S chassis, Gt86/GR86) then an LSD is absolutely beneficial.

[Spektyr]

As much as the kid in me wants more horsepower, these cars (particularly Gen2's) are just about perfect as they are.

You can absolutely yeet them into a turn and then decide with little more than throttle input whether you're going to go around like the batmobile grappling hook turn with your face trying to slide off the side of your head, or, with an extra dab of throttle slip the tail loose for a ludicrously easy-mode drift.

And they're so well-behaved tail-out. If you keep consistent pressure on the throttle they don't snap going loose or snap when the tires hook back up.

The stock power is just enough to drive the car however you like without being so much you have to always be careful with your throttle input. And if you want to learn that - simple - just drive in the wet or snow.

It's like Toyobaru knew what they were doing.

Which honestly is baffling: they know how to make cars like this and - for the most part - choose not to.

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by Spektyr

As much as the kid in me wants more horsepower, these cars (particularly Gen2's) are just about perfect as they are.

You can absolutely yeet them into a turn and then decide with little more than throttle input whether you're going to go around like the batmobile grappling hook turn with your face trying to slide off the side of your head, or, with an extra dab of throttle slip the tail loose for a ludicrously easy-mode drift.

And they're so well-behaved tail-out. If you keep consistent pressure on the throttle they don't snap going loose or snap when the tires hook back up.

The stock power is just enough to drive the car however you like without being so much you have to always be careful with your throttle input. And if you want to learn that - simple - just drive in the wet or snow.

It's like Toyobaru knew what they were doing.

Which honestly is baffling: they know how to make cars like this and - for the most part - choose not to.

I want to add one more thing that I feel does not get enough credit about this platform. The practicality!



Those small rear seats get made fun of by reviewers all the time but they are the difference between making the purchase and not making it. For me, I used the FT86 as an only car for close to 4 years. I was able to pull that off because of those small rear seats and the relatively large trunk. I did give rides for 4 adults in total in that car believe it or not. Were the people happy about it? no.. did it get the job done? absolutely yes. This is a huge factor for this car.



Also, I totally agree, powersliding this car is a big part of owning it. Without this part, I think I would skip.



I heard the Mustang GT350 can never power oversteer for some reason. I don't know how true this claim is but if it indeed is, that car is out. I want smiles on my road trip.



I think the only thing missing from the FT86 is the soundtrack of say a V6. Not power, I'm fine with the old 2.0 and now even more so with the bigger engine.